Two versions of the Glimmers Dub...

Okay, so, am I the first sad completist to notice that there are two different versions of 'The Glimmers Dub' of Krafty..?

The Black CD Promo features one at 5:53 which is very heavy, and doesn't feature too much of the original. The 'Glimmers Dub' on the official 12", however, is more like an instrumental version of the 'Glimmers 12" Extended Mix', with some extra female vocal ad-libs and dubby bits, that only clocks in at 5:22 (despite the sleeve incorrectly claiming it's 5:53). Wonder if these were both, in fact, remixed by Glimmers, or if the Promo CD is a mis-titled remix?

Who knows..?

So, this far, I make it we have the following remixes:

Krafty (Single Edit) 3:48 From ‘Krafty’ CD single

Krafty (Album Version) 4:32 From ‘Krafty’ CD single

Krafty (The Glimmers 12” Extended) 6:53 From ‘Krafty’ remix CD single

Krafty (Phones Reality Remix) 7:04 From ‘Krafty’ remix CD single

Krafty (Andy Green Remix) 3:22 From ‘Krafty’ remix CD single

Krafty (Re-Edit Of Album Version) 4:49 From ‘Krafty’ remix CD single

Krafty (The Glimmers Dub Version) 5:22 From ‘Krafty’ 12”

Krafty (The Glimmers Dub Version) 5:53 Different mix from ‘Krafty’ CD promo

Krafty (Riton Re-Dub Remix) 6:55 From ‘Krafty’ CD promo

So, the next question is: is the 'Re-Edit Of Album Version' different to this 'Bernard's Re-Edit' floating around on some other promos?

Andy

Well spotted so i am glad i have the 5 TRACK PROMO too.

SAD BUT TRUE

Haven't we all agreed that the Andy Green mix and the album re-edit have been erroneously switched with one another?

Why?

Because the track that is labeled a re-edit sounds like a remix and the track that is labeled a remix sounds like a re-edit.

Mind you it's not like Saville Associates haven't got song titles wrong before or in which way they should appear on any given cd/vinyl.

Mr Discography wrote: So, the next question is: is the 'Re-Edit Of Album Version' different to this 'Bernard's Re-Edit' floating around on some other promos?

Andy

Andy I think you'll find that 'Bernard's Re-Edit' is another mix again, separate to the 'Album Re-Edit'. I'm still waiting for my singles package to arrive from HMV, however I've been informed that the 'Album Re-Edit' has a mixing credit on the single and it's not Bernard.

As far as I know, the only place this mysterious 'Bernard's Re-Edit' appears is via a Napster download, coming online later this month. We won't know for sure until then. It may also be chance to appear on the US maxi single and we're still awaiting the tracklisting for that one.

Then there's the Japanese version of Krafty which you may include in your versions' list?

:\pimp3:

depthcharge wrote:

Mr Discography wrote: So, the next question is: is the 'Re-Edit Of Album Version' different to this 'Bernard's Re-Edit' floating around on some other promos?

Andy

Andy I think you'll find that 'Bernard's Re-Edit' is another mix again, separate to the 'Album Re-Edit'. I'm still waiting for my singles package to arrive from HMV, however I've been informed that the 'Album Re-Edit' has a mixing credit on the single and it's not Bernard.

As far as I know, the only place this mysterious 'Bernard's Re-Edit' appears is via a Napster download, coming online later this month. We won't know for sure until then. It may also be chance to appear on the US maxi single and we're still awaiting the tracklisting for that one.

Then there's the Japanese version of Krafty which you may include in your versions' list?

:\pimp3:

The album re-edit gives mixing credit to Rich Costey, who also gets mixing credit for the album version and the single edit.

Which kind of blows the Andy Green Remix switch theory out of the water.

Old Blue wrote: Which kind of blows the Andy Green Remix switch theory out of the water.

Why?

Because he already mixed the album version, hence his second effort is a re-edit.

Co-incidentally, the seller of THIS ITEM has just this minute replied to my question asking how long the track was. Guess what - 3:25...

Old Blue wrote: Because he already mixed the album version, hence his second effort is a re-edit.

Co-incidentally, the seller of THIS ITEM has just this minute replied to my question asking how long the track was. Guess what - 3:25...

And you would expect a re-edit to sound pretty similar to the original, which track 3 does, and track 4 does not.

OK, we'll agree to differ on that one... :)

Bugger, you're not going to bid are you? I have a real moral dilema bidding against people I know. The ammount of items I've passed on to let a certain Scandanavian have a go...

Old Blue wrote: OK, we'll agree to differ on that one... :)

That sounds fine to me.:)